No Pot in Jail – California court rules inmates can’t have marijuana in jail

Out of a seven-member panel, only two voted to allow inmates in California prisons to possess and use marijuana.

California has always been ahead of other states with its cannabis reforms, but the move to decriminalize marijuana for prison inmates seems far-fetched.

Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled that marijuana possession on California prison grounds remains illegal. This means that prisoners under the criminal system in California will be punished if they are found in possession of cannabis flowers or products. With this judgment, an earlier judgment of a lower court was overturned.

In 1996, California became the first state to approve the use of marijuana for its therapeutic benefits. Legislation on marijuana for adult use was finalized in 2016; 20 years after medical marijuana was legalized.

California currently holds the record for having the largest legal recreational cannabis market in the world.

Suggestion 64

This is the legal act legalizing the possession and use of recreational marijuana by Californians 21 years or older.

There appears to be loopholes in the Prop-64 Act as it concerns whether or not prisoners of marijuana should be allowed to use this measure.

There were several arguments in court in this regard, with different judges ruling for or against.

Proposition 64 was passed by voters in 2016 to authorize the possession and use of a defined amount of cannabis for adults.

Some proponents have suggested that the law also encourages inmate use of cannabis, while it’s hard to understand that voters hinted at this when they voted on the bill.

Before the decision of the Supreme Court on Thursday, the lower courts carried out several proceedings in this regard without a concrete result.

Judgment of the regional court

In 2019, a lower appeals court ruled that prisoners were allowed to own marijuana but not use it.

This judgment was illogical, a judge said the judgment was contrary to common sense. There was no point in allowing prisoners up to 1 ounce of marijuana in a prison.

The California attorney general denied the ruling on the grounds that Proposition 64 did not establish that prisoners could have or keep the drug in prison. The Supreme Court also agreed with the attorney general, adding that prop 64 is in no way affiliated with Californians serving sentences in prison.

Assistant Judge Joshua Groban wrote that voters had no desire to decriminalize marijuana in California prisons. He wrote on behalf of the majority, adding that the majority were solidly behind the attorney general.

The majority are certain that if the drafters of the measure of measure wanted to include 64 prison inmates in the bill, they would have said it explicitly. It is implausible that the writers had plans to change prison cannabis laws in this way.

The lower court suggested that state law enforcement officers consider adding to the rules that “marijuana is prohibited inside the prison”. Like alcohol and tobacco, marijuana is considered a rule violation.

This would prevent new charges from being added to the charges against detainees and would not extend the sentences.

The Supreme Court ruling

The convictions of five inmates found in the prison with marijuana were appealed by the defendants in the 3rd District Court of Appeals in Sacramento. The appeals courts overturned the convictions, stating that only California prisons made it illegal to use cannabis, according to the language of state law. The defendant’s attorney stated that the law does not clearly state that it makes cannabis possession illegal in prison.

The case was referred to the Supreme Court after the Attorney General challenged the Sacramento Court of Appeal ruling. The meeting should have taken place in 2020. The coronavirus lockdown has halted all judicial activity within the state and has been postponed.

Just as the California appeals courts ruled that possession of cannabis in prisons remained a criminal act, so did the Supreme Court.

The minority

Associate Judges Leondra Kruger and Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar argued in a partial disagreement. They wrote for the minority, claiming that while voters did not specifically authorize marijuana possession in prisons, they may have intended to indulge inmates in prisons.

The content of prop 64 causes two criminal laws to overlap. It indirectly gives prosecutors a choice between charges that have a harsher sentence than the other.

Judge Kruger argued that voters may have written prop 64 this way to reduce sentences for inmates found with cannabis. This can go either way as it could backfire on the inmate.

The majority

Judge Groban wrote that the majority understood that the law governing general cannabis possession is in part different from the laws governing cannabis possession in California prisons and prisons. This extreme discrepancy can also be seen in laws governing the possession of other substances such as alcohol and tobacco.

The law states that inmates found behind bars with cannabis in jail or jail risk eight years in prison for just one gram of cannabis. This law seems unfair, but a prison is a correctional facility and prohibited drugs should not be found on its premises.

Permitting prison inmates to use and possess cannabis may not be a safe option, as officers can be harmed by inmates with high levels of psychoactive drug use.

Bottom line

Cannabis is still banned in California prisons. Voters can also start correcting the gaps to avoid repeating this form of illogical reasoning.

Little did voters know, as Judge Groban wrote, that Proposal 64 could affect the existing ban on possession and use of cannabis in correctional facilities in California prisons.

Note that medical marijuana is not legal for inmates in California prisons.

MARIJUANA IN PRISON, READ MORE …

NEW MEXICO TO ENSURE INMATEUR ACCESS TO MARIJUANA, CLICK HERE!